Earnings Report


  1. William Michaelian
    William Michaelian November 17, 2008 at 8:29 pm .

    My gut feeling has always been that in joining — and as a result being accepted — one signs away an important part of himself. And yet this doesn’t preclude working together toward a common goal or greater understanding, in terms of art or anything else. In my mind, a healthy school or movement would be known by the fierce independence of its members, their openness and willingness to change, and

  2. brian a j s
    brian a j s November 17, 2008 at 1:36 am .

    Maybe I am more closed than I like to think I am, but I have never seen myself as "a joiner" either when it comes to literary schools and movements despite my willingness to explore aspects of them; and I agree with you about "arrogance" and "openness".

  3. Joseph Hutchison
    Joseph Hutchison November 15, 2008 at 1:37 am .

    I have nothing against the avant-garde except the arrogance of its members. Same thing I had against the Formalists, certain of the Beats, etc. I’m a fan of openness and so have never been a joiner: the attraction of schools and movements of any kind eludes me.

  4. brian a j s
    brian a j s November 14, 2008 at 5:33 am .

    Where to begin?<BR/><BR/>This post is special because of the<BR/>angles of vision you explore in it.<BR/><BR/>I feel a change in the air that favors those of us who are not<BR/>primarily avant-garde. On his <BR/>blog, Todd Swift has a link to<BR/>Dennis O’Driscoll’s Guardian<BR/>Seamus Heaney interview. On my<BR/>Rho– blog there now is also a<BR/>link to it. Heaney’s response <BR/>to an

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Verified by ExactMetrics
Verified by MonsterInsights